Do you know the true cost of your food? Most of us think it’s only a few dollars at the grocery store, but what if you knew the many effects the food industry has on your health and wellness?

Our food production technology is at its height, but that technology is used to grow the profits of the poorly regulated food industry rather than focus on improving public health and wellness. While there are two different agencies watching over our food supply, their duties are intertwined in a way that makes both of them borderline ineffective.

Marion Nestle points out in Resisting Food Safety that the FDA regulates everything but meat, but even then their duties only end at the slaughterhouse. This means a fairly small agency monitors all of our food, drugs, and even our meat all the way up until it is killed.

At the same time, the much larger USDA only monitors animals post-death. The way that the duties are split between the two agencies is mind-bending, and shows the convoluted way our food is taken care of. It also shows how easily and often oversight happens regarding our food.

For example, at one point Nestle mentions, “The law specified that the department’s (USDA’s) authority began at the slaughterhouse. USDA inspectors had no right to recall meat once it left the plant. If USDA inspectors believed that a packing plant was producing tainted meat, their only recourse was to deny further inspection, in effect forcing the plant to close.”

The USDA is not able to prevent outbreaks, and if an outbreak does happen, they don’t have the authority to recall the product. This is a clear problem, since their only real course of action is to stop doing their job and shut down a plant in that way. Nestle also points out that the original legislature for the food industry was created to protect the animals, indicating one reason the agencies may have so many issues.

One solution to this problem was mentioned in Food Inc. Kevin’s mom tells the story of how she lost her son, and then mentions Kevin’s Law, which would have forced the USDA to establish performance standards to decrease pathogens in our food, as well as allow the USDA to shut down plants. Kevin’s law was never passed, however Obama did pass the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011 which upheld some of Kevin’s law.

Because of the FSMA, the USDA now has authority to issue mandatory recalls if the party responsible for an outbreak refuses to issue a recall. The act also called for increased training of officials, more infrastructure and capacity of food safety programs, along with many other stipulations created in order to increase food safety.

As demonstrated by Kevin’s story and the passage of the FSMA, the most common problems brought to light about the food industry are food borne pathogens. Harmful bacteria such as e. coli, listeria, and salmonella are byproducts of our highly industrialized food production system.

Food-borne pathogens are the byproducts of the feces and blood covering our slaughterhouses and animal coups. These diseases are allowed to spread to our food through various means and can cause mass outbreaks throughout the country.

Rather than maintaining a clean environment for the animals and solving the problem at the root, the food industry came up with different way to combat the pathogens. In Food Inc. we were shown that there are small amounts of ammonia mixed into ground beef to try and kill E. Coli. The documentary also talks about how animals are given antibiotics, even if they are not sick, to try and prevent diseases.

Blake Hurst in Organic Illusions tells us that the FDA says harmful chemicals such as ammonia have been shown to not be harmful in small doses; however, he does not mention that there is still a real threat of antibiotic resistance. The antibiotics given to our food are spread to humans when they eat it, this then causes bacteria to build up a resistance to antibiotics, creating much more harmful pathogens.

 

Another side of government oversight is shown in You Are What They Eat, which drives home the point that our food may not be what we believe it should be, and there is not much being done about it. For instance, parts of very sick downer cows are approved to be part of animal feed, as long as they are not fed to other cows.

These cows can then be fed to pigs, chickens and fish, which can be eventually fed back to cows, causing a possible spread of the prions that cause mad cow disease. Even the restriction of not feeding downer cows to other cows is lax. For instance, “More than four years after the feed ban took effect, the FDA still hadn’t acted promptly to compel firms to keep prohibited proteins out of cattle feed and to label animal feed that cannot be fed to cattle’”(You are What They Eat).

If the FDA is not taking steps to ensure that mad cow disease is not being spread, are they truly doing what they are supposed to do?

Another consequence of the ever-growing food industry may be an environmental one. According to Cassandra Brooks in Consequences of Increased Global Meat Consumption, the worldwide consumption of livestock will double by 2020. Because of this huge increase, the food industry has increasing profits, and is ignoring the many effects they are causing on public health, wellness, and even the environment.

 

Livestock production has become extremely industrialized in order to meet the demand, and it is taking a toll on the environment. According to the Livestock, Environment and Development (LEAD) Initiative, “Livestock Production accounts for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, including 9 percent carbon dioxide and 37 percent of methane gas emissions worldwide” (Cassandra Brooks).

Global warming and climate change mainly affect farming communities; the United States experiences some of this backlash, but it is mostly felt in other countries, such as Ethiopia, which rely on farming to survive. Global warming also affects places such as California and Central America, which are the sources of most of our produce. By creating so many greenhouse gas emissions, the livestock industry may be harming the other parts of our food production system, as well as creating worsening poverty and hunger in areas such as Ethiopia.

While global warming is not the focus of this article, it does bring to question the true consequences of our food industry. The food industry has caused many small farmers to go out of business, or switch to industrial farming, which they may despise. Industrialized food production is also responsible for a rise in food-borne pathogens and deaths from these pathogens.

Another consequence may be the rise in obesity and type 2 diabetes. When our food is processed, there are certain ingredients put in such as high fructose corn syrup, which is harder for our bodies to process than simple sugars. This creates a spike in insulin, causing a feeling of hunger more quickly, even though a person may not truly need more food.

Food Inc. shows this phenomenon when introducing a lower class family that has to feed themselves. Rather than buy fruit and healthier foods in the grocery store, the family eats at McDonald’s most days because they can afford it, and it doesn’t take too much time out of their busy schedule.

Because of their inability to buy nutritious food, the whole family is overweight or obese, and now has to budget in diabetes medication for the father.

What we should be asking the food industry is, should they really be risking the health and lives of family in order to make a larger profit? Why is addictive fast food so cheap when less dangerous food is too expensive for many people in America?

After realizing these consequences, it may seem that organic foods are the obvious choice, however, many people cannot afford to buy organic food, even though according to You Are What They Eat, Organic food is only 20-30% more expensive.

Now you should (hopefully) be wondering how we can solve these issues, and improve our lives and health. The best way to do that is to learn more about the food industry and use your new knowledge to make informed decisions about what you buy. If everyone focuses on buying sustainable food, the food industry will be forced to change, and maybe within the next few decades our current way of food production will have gone the way of the tobacco industry.

 

Reflection Questions:

• Describe your understanding of the “writer’s project”? How were you able to identify the texts’ “project”? Discuss your own “project” as it pertains to this particular blog article.

 

The writer’s project is the point they are trying to make in their writing. When I was reading each article I just asked myself “Why are they writing this?” in order to determine their project. My own project is to raise awareness of the food industry, and what it’s doing to consumers.

 

• Describe your completion of the “Sorting it Out” workshop? What sections were most beneficial to the development of your ideas—and why? Discuss how this workshop assisted in development of draft and/or assignment organization?

 

Completing the “Sorting it Out” workshop really allowed me to organize my thoughts. Part C was the most beneficial to me to see the overview of each text and the project each writer had. It helped with my organization because I was able to gather my opinions on each text and work them into a draft.

 

• Describe your understanding of synthesis. What is its importance? How did it manifest within your drafts and/or final blog article? Provide examples.

 

Synthesis is combining different texts in a way that they can work together, either as complements or as contradictions. It’s important because it allows you to see different sides of an argument and put them together. Basically my whole article was a synthesis, I took the different articles and put them together in a way that allowed me to draw my own conclusions.

 

• Describe your own accomplishment (ofsomething) during this unit.

I was able to take multiple texts that were seemingly only related by their topic, and turn them into something cohesive. If it had been up to me, I would have started with more cohesive texts and it would have been much easier, but this let me push myself.

 

• Discuss the evolution of the main idea. Where did you begin (include the example) and show its progress (again, include example) throughout the drafting/revision process. To what do you attribute its evolution?

 

I already knew what my main idea was when I started writing, so it has remained constant throughout the process. For example, this paragraph has stayed the same through pretty much every draft:

“Although our food production technology is at its height, that technology may be used to grow the profits of the poorly regulated food industry, rather than focus on improving public health and wellness. While there are two different agencies watching over our food supply, their duties are intertwined in a way that makes both of them borderline ineffective.”

 

 

• Discuss what organizational strategies you implemented in order to structure this blog article. Provide examples from a section(s) of an earlier draft and other excerpts in later drafts to support your response.

 

When I was writing this, I basically just started writing, and from there saw what my main points were. I then copy and pasted paragraphs that went together until it formed an organized paper.

 

For example I started with the below paragraph, and then split it up and merged parts with other paragraphs in order to form a stronger argument:

Food Inc., You are what they eat, and Resisting Food Safety all say that the food industry is careless in the way they are treating the bacteria, and the government is not doing much to help. In Resisting Food Safety, Nestle points out that the original legislature for food production was created to protect the animals.  In Food Inc. Kevin’s mom tells the story of how she lost her son, and then mentions Kevin’s Law, which would have forced the USDA to establish performance standards to decrease pathogens in our food, as well as allow the USDA to shut down plants. Kevin’s law was never passed, however Obama did pass the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011 which upheld some of Kevin’s law. This gave the government slightly more control over what goes into our food, but it still may not be enough.

 

 

 

• Provide an example of the final draft where you successfully synthesize 3 texts in a concise and direct manner. Discuss how this evolved throughout the drafting process for you.

 

“Marion Nestle points out in Resisting Food Safety that the FDA regulates everything but meat, but even then their duties only end at the slaughterhouse. This means a fairly small agency monitors all of our food, drugs, and even our meat all the way up until it is killed.”

“One solution to this problem was mentioned in Food Inc. Kevin’s mom tells the story of how she lost her son, and then mentions Kevin’s Law, which would have forced the USDA to establish performance standards to decrease pathogens in our food, as well as allow the USDA to shut down plants. Kevin’s law was never passed, however…”

 

“Another side of government oversight is shown in You Are What They Eat, which drives home the point that our food may not be what we believe it should be, and there is not much being done about it. For instance, parts of very sick downer cows are approved to be part of animal feed, as long as they are not fed to other cows.”

These three texts are the most relevant to my article, they each dealt with government oversight and how that affects our health. At first my synthesis was all summary, but throughout the draft process, I was able to take the summary and analyze it (the paragraphs between each of these)

 

 

 

• Discuss the evolution of the ‘lede’ in earlier drafts and its final version (provide examples of each): where did you begin, what feedback did you receive, and how did it end up in final blog article?

 

I started with: Although our food production technology is at its height, that technology may be used to grow the profits of the poorly regulated food industry, rather than focus on improving public health and wellness.

From there I knew it wasn’t catchy enough so I came up with: Do you know the true cost of your food? While it may only be a few dollars at the grocery store, in reality your food comes from a poorly regulated industry that is wreaking havoc on the environment and putting your health, and the health of everyone around you at risk.

But the peer review made me realize that my lede was not as strong as I wanted, so I changed it to what it is now:

Do you know the true cost of your food? Most of us think it’s only a few dollars at the grocery store, but what if you knew the many effects the food industry has on your health and wellness?

 

 

 

• Name a specific writing/researching/revision goal you’d like to work on during the next Unit projects.

 

I would like to work on overall cohesiveness. I feel like my article jumps around a bit more than it should. It follows my thought process, but I think it would be stronger if I were able to relate and analyze everything even more.

 

 

 

 

 

Do you know the true cost of your food? While it may only be a few dollars at the grocery store, in reality your food comes from a poorly regulated industry that is wreaking havoc on the environment and putting your health, and the health of everyone around you at risk.

Our food production technology is at its height, but that technology is  used to grow the profits of the poorly regulated food industry rather than focus on improving public health and wellness. While there are two different agencies watching over our food supply, their duties are intertwined in a way that makes both of them borderline ineffective.

Marion Nestle points out in Resisting Food Safety that the FDA focuses on everything but meat, but even then their duties only end at the slaughterhouse. This means a fairly small agency monitors all of our food, drugs, and even our meat all the way up until it is killed.

At the same time,  the much  larger USDA only monitors animals post-death. The way that the duties are split between the two agencies is mind bending, and shows the convoluted way our food is taken care of. It also shows how easily and often oversight happens regarding our food.

For example, at one point she mentions, “the law specified that the department’s (USDA’s) authority began at the slaughterhouse. USDA inspectors had no right to recall meat once it left the plant. If USDA inspectors believed that a packing plant was producing tainted meat, their only recourse was to deny further inspection, in effect forcing the plant to close.”

The USDA is not able to prevent outbreaks, and if an outbreak does happen, they may not recall the product. This is a clear problem, since their only real course of action is to stop doing their job and shut down a plant in that way. Nestle also points out that the original legislature for the food industry was created to protect the animals, indicating one reason the agencies may have so many issues.

In Food Inc. Kevin’s mom tells the story of how she lost her son, and then mentions Kevin’s Law, which would have forced the USDA to establish performance standards to decrease pathogens in our food, as well as allow the USDA to shut down plants. Kevin’s law was never passed, however Obama did pass the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011 which upheld some of Kevin’s law. This gave the government slightly more control over what goes into our food, but it still may not be enough.

The most common problems brought to light about the food industry are food borne pathogens. Harmful bacteria such as e. coli, listeria, and salmonella are byproducts of our highly industrialized food production system where there is blood and feces all over the slaughterhouses and animal coops.

These diseases are allowed to spread into our food through various means and can cause mass outbreaks throughout the country. Rather than maintaining a clean environment for the animals and solving the problem at the root, the food industry came up with different way to combat the pathogens.

In Food Inc. they showed that there are small amounts of ammonia mixed into ground beef to try and kill E. Coli. The documentary also talks about how animals are given antibiotics, even if they are not sick, to try and prevent diseases.

Blake Hurst in Organic Illusions points out that harmful chemicals such as ammonia have been shown to not be harmful in small doses; however, he does not mention that there is still a real threat of antibiotic resistance. The antibiotics given to our food is spread to humans when they eat it, this then causes bacteria to build up a resistance to antibiotics, creating much more harmful pathogens.

Another side of government oversight is shown in You are what they eat, which drives home the point that our food may not be what we believe it should be, and there is not much being done about it. For instance, parts of very sick downer cows are approved to be part of animal feed, as long as they are not fed to other cows.

Meanwhile, these cows can be fed to pigs and chickens and fish, which can be eventually fed back to cows, causing a possible spread of the prions that cause mad cow disease. Even the restriction of not feeding downer cows to other cows is lax. For instance, “more than four years after the feed ban took effect, the FDA still hadn’t acted promptly to compel firms to keep prohibited proteins out of cattle feed and to label animal feed that cannot be fed to cattle.’”

If the FDA is not taking steps to ensure that mad cow disease is not being spread, are they truly doing what they are supposed to do?

Another consequence of the ever-growing food industry may be an environmental one. According to Cassandra Brooks in Consequences of increased global meat consumption, the worldwide consumption of livestock will double by 2020. Because of this huge increase, the food industry is growing its profits, and ignoring the huge effects they are causing on public health, wellness, and even the environment.

Livestock production has become hugely industrialized in order to meet the demand, and it is taking a toll on the environment. According to the Livestock, Environment and Development (LEAD) Initiative, “Livestock Production accounts for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, including 9 percent carbon dioxide and 37 percent of methane gas emissions worldwide” (Cassandra Brooks).

Global warming and climate change mainly affect farming communities, the United States experiences some of this backlash, but it is mostly felt in other countries, such as Ethiopia, which rely on farming to survive. Global warming also affects places such as California and Central America, which are the sources of most of our produce. By creating so many greenhouse gas emissions, the livestock industry may be harming the other parts of our food production system, as well as creating worsening poverty and hunger in areas such as Ethiopia.

While global warming is not the focus of this article, it does bring to question the true consequences of our food industry. The food industry has caused many small farmers to go out of business, or switch to industrial farming, which they may despise. It also is responsible for a rise in food-borne pathogens and deaths from these pathogens.

Another consequence may be the rise in obesity and type 2 diabetes. When our food is processed, there are certain ingredients put in like high fructose corn syrup, which is harder to process than simple sugars. This creates a spike in insulin, causing a feeling of hunger more quickly, even though a person may not truly need more food.

Food Inc. shows this when introducing a lower class family that has to feed themselves. Rather than buy fruit and healthier foods in the grocery store, the family eats at McDonald’s most days because they can afford it, and it doesn’t take too much time out of their busy schedule.

Because of their inability to buy nutritious food, the whole family is overweight or even obese, and now has to budget in diabetes medication for the father.

What we should be asking the food industry is, should they really be risking the health and lives of family in order to make a larger profit? Why is addictive fast food so cheap when less dangerous food is too expensive for many people in America?

After realizing these consequences, it may seem that organic foods are the obvious choice, however, many people cannot afford to buy organic food, even though according to You Are What They Eat, Organic food is only 20-30% more expensive.

There are critics to organic food, like Blake Hurst, who in Organic Illusions cites facts from a study done by Stanford University comparing organic produce and conventionally grown produce. According to Hurst, growing all of our food organically will cause a shortage of land, labor and cause us to revert to the early 1900s when tractors did not exist.

While Hurst does bring up certain points, like the fact that the government does not check to see if companies are actually following organic guidelines, and there are natural pesticides. Hurst incorrectly cites the Stanford experiment, which already has results that conflict with other studies.

Although our food production technology is at its height, that technology may be used to grow the profits of the poorly regulated food industry, rather than focus on improving public health and wellness. While there are two different agencies watching over our food supply, their duties are intertwined in a way that makes both of them borderline ineffective.

Marion Nestle points out in Resisting Food Safety that the FDA focuses on everything but meat, but even then their duties only end at the slaughterhouse, meaning a fairly small agency monitors all of our food, drugs, and even the animals all the way up until they are killed. Meanwhile, the larger USDA only monitors animals post-death. The way that the duties are split between the two agencies is mind bending, and shows the convoluted way our food is taken care of.

Food Inc., You are what they eat, and Resisting Food Safety all say that the food industry is careless in the way they are treating the bacteria, and the government is not doing much to help. In Resisting Food Safety, Nestle points out that the original legislature for food production was created to protect the animals.  In Food Inc. Kevin’s mom tells the story of how she lost her son, and then mentions Kevin’s Law, which would have forced the USDA to establish performance standards to decrease pathogens in our food, as well as allow the USDA to shut down plants. Kevin’s law was never passed, however Obama did pass the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011 which upheld some of Kevin’s law. This gave the government slightly more control over what goes into our food, but it still may not be enough.

The most common problems brought to light about the food industry are food borne pathogens. Harmful bacteria such as e. coli, listeria, and salmonella are byproducts of our highly industrialized food production system where there is blood and feces all over the slaughterhouses and animal coops. These diseases are allowed to spread into our food through various means and can cause mass outbreaks throughout the country. Rather than maintaining a clean environment for the animals and solving the problem at the root, the food industry came up with different way to combat the pathogens. In Food Inc. they showed that there are small amounts of ammonia mixed into ground beef to try and kill E. Coli, the documentary also talked about how animals are given antibiotics, even if they are not sick, to try and prevent diseases. While Blake Hurst in Organic Illusions points out that harmful chemicals such as ammonia have been shown to not be harmful in small doses, there is still a real threat of antibiotic immunity. The antibiotics given to our food is spread to humans when they eat it, this then causes bacteria to build up a resistance to antibiotics, creating much more harmful pathogens.

Another side of government oversight is shown in You are what they eat which drives home the point that our food may not be what we believe it should be, and there is not much being done about it. For instance, parts of very sick downer cows is approved to be part of animal feed, as long as it is not fed to other cows. However, these cows can be fed to pigs and chickens and fish, which can be eventually fed back to cows, causing a possible spread of the prions that cause mad cow disease. Even the part about not feeding downer cows to other cows is lax, “more than four years after the feed ban took effect, the FDA still hadn’t acted promptly to compel firms to keep prohibited proteins out of cattle feed and to label animal feed that cannot be fed to cattle.’” If the FDA is not taking steps to ensure that mad cow disease is not being spread, are they truly doing what they are supposed to do?

The Food industry is growing each year, according to Cassandra Brooks in Consequences of increased global meat consumption, the worldwide consumption of livestock will double by 2020. Because of this huge increase, the food industry is growing its profits, and ignoring the huge effects they are causing on public health, wellness, and even the environment. Livestock production has become hugely industrialized in order to meet the demand, and it is taking a toll on the environment. According to the Livestock, Environment and Development (LEAD) Initiative, “Livestock Production accounts for 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, including 9 percent carbon dioxide and 37 percent of methane gas emissions worldwide” (Cassandra Brooks).

Global warming and climate change mainly affect farming communities, the United States experiences some of this backlash, but it is mostly felt in other countries, such as Ethiopia, which rely on farming to survive. Global warming also affects places such as California and Central America, which are the sources of most of our produce. By creating so many greenhouse gas emissions, the livestock industry may be harming the other parts of our food production system, as well as creating worsening poverty and hunger in areas such as Ethiopia.

While global warming is not the focus of this article, it does bring to question the true consequences of our food industry. The food industry has caused many small farmers to go out of business, or switch to industrial farming, which they may not enjoy at all. It also is responsible for a rise in food-borne pathogens and deaths from these pathogens. Another consequence may be the rise in obesity and type 2 diabetes. When our food is processed, there are certain ingredients put in like high fructose corn syrup, which is harder to process than simple sugars. This creates a spike in insulin, causing a feeling of hunger more quickly, even though a person may not truly need more food.

After realizing these consequences, it may seem that organic foods are the obvious choice, however, many people cannot afford to buy organic food, even though according to You Are What They Eat, Organic food is only 20-30% more expensive.